Posted by Jtpsops on 2/16/2012 2:47:00 PM (view original):Question is, how many pitchers did that back in the 70s? I don't know the answer. If he's the only one, then yes, it's an impressive feat and he probably deserves HOF inclusion.

My guess is you'll find a few. The Niekros, the Perrys, Carlton, Sutton, Jenkins, Ryan(came in a little later) all had long enough careers in that era. But you'll also probably find they all have ERA over 3 and that they're in the HOF.

This.

And, quite honestly, I'm not sure I put ANY of them in MY HOF. Just saying, during that era, being a workhorse with a 3ish ERA was considered Hall-worthy.

You wouldn't put Nolan Ryan in your HOF?

Or Carlton? The guy pitched over 5000 innings and is 4th all time in strikeouts.

Ryan lost as often as he won, walked a shitload, ERA of 3.19 in the same era as Hunter's 3.26 and a WHIP of 1.25. No-hitters and strikeouts are his "WOW" factor.
Carlton is a little tougher to dismiss but he lost 244 games, had an ERA between Ryan and Hunter and his WHIP was also 1.25.
Hunter's WHIP was 1.134 and his ERA was the same for all practical purposes.

The difference between the three, other than Hunter's obvious ability to limit baserunners better, was longevity. Welcome to the Hall of Play a Long Time and Accumulate.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/17/2012 2:38:00 PM (view original):Ryan lost as often as he won, walked a shitload, ERA of 3.19 in the same era as Hunter's 3.26 and a WHIP of 1.25. No-hitters and strikeouts are his "WOW" factor.
Carlton is a little tougher to dismiss but he lost 244 games, had an ERA between Ryan and Hunter and his WHIP was also 1.25.
Hunter's WHIP was 1.134 and his ERA was the same for all practical purposes.

The difference between the three, other than Hunter's obvious ability to limit baserunners better, was longevity. Welcome to the Hall of Play a Long Time and Accumulate.

It's odd how often you claim to not be a stat-nerd, yet your perception of who should and should not be in the HOF seems to be solely from the stat-nerd POV.

Incorrect, KCD. When arguing with stat-nerds, you have to fight on their turf.

I watched all three as a child/teenager. Ryan "felt" like the best pitcher ever, Carlton "felt" like a guy who needed to pitch for a better team and Hunter "felt" like he was in the right place at the right time. But a child falls in love with the magical no-hitter and 100 MPH fastball.

The objective is to win the game. Winning 1-0 or 9-8 is still a win. Is W/L record the be all to end all? Of course not. But neither is a strikeout or an inning pitched. And that's the only places Carlton is better than Hunter. Congrats on sticking around a long time. Welcome to the Hall of Longevity and Injury Free.

Just so I have this right, W/L record is a horrible way to judge effectiveness but 300 wins is an accomplishment. Averaging 277 innings over 10 seasons in meaningless if your ERA is 3.26 but pitching 5000 innings and recording an ERA of 3.22 is an accomplishment.

It's laughable the way your mind works. I started ignoring you earlier. I now remember why.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/17/2012 3:00:00 PM (view original):Just so I have this right, W/L record is a horrible way to judge effectiveness but 300 wins is an accomplishment. Averaging 277 innings over 10 seasons in meaningless if your ERA is 3.26 but pitching 5000 innings and recording an ERA of 3.22 is an accomplishment.

It's laughable the way your mind works. I started ignoring you earlier. I now remember why.

I've never argued for someone based on 300 wins. Pitcher win/loss record is next to meaningless.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/17/2012 2:53:00 PM (view original):The objective is to win the game. Winning 1-0 or 9-8 is still a win. Is W/L record the be all to end all? Of course not. But neither is a strikeout or an inning pitched. And that's the only places Carlton is better than Hunter. Congrats on sticking around a long time. Welcome to the Hall of Longevity and Injury Free.

I have to applaud you. It takes skill to play thousands of sim/hbd games and still know absolutely nothing about baseball. Truly amazing.

Being able to pitch a ton of well above average innings is extremely valuable. Carlton was better than Hunter. It's not tough to see.

Cartlon threw 5,217 innings
Hunter threw 3,449.

Carlton had an ERA of 3.22
Hunter had an ERA of 3.26

Carlton had an ERA + of 115
Hunter had an ERA+ of 105

Carlton struck out 4136
Hunter struck out 2012

Carlton had a FIP (fielding independent pitching, scaled to ERA) of 3.15
Hunter had a FIP of 3.66

Carlton BB/9 3.16
Hunter BB/9 2.49

Carlton HR/9 0.71
Hunter HR/9 0.98

The innings and strikeouts alone put Carlton way over Hunter. Innings are valuable. Realistically, a pitcher can only control a few things: his K rate, his walk rate, and his HR rate. Hunter has the edge in the walks but Carlton's lead in innings and strikeouts are so much larger that BB/9 rate difference isn't enough to sway anything in Hunter's favor.